On Caution Regarding Recent Substack News
A quick note regarding the Platformer article and removing accounts.
Hello everyone!
As many of you will soon discover Platformer has an article out regarding the removal of accounts on this platform. They quoted Substack as saying this:
If and when we become aware of other content that violates our guidelines, we will take appropriate action.
Relatedly, we’ve heard your feedback about Substack’s content moderation approach, and we understand your concerns and those of some other writers on the platform. We sincerely regret how this controversy has affected writers on Substack.
We appreciate the input from everyone. Writers are the backbone of Substack and we take this feedback very seriously. We are actively working on more reporting tools that can be used to flag content that potentially violates our guidelines, and we will continue working on tools for user moderation so Substack users can set and refine the terms of their own experience on the platform.
It reads to me Substack is simply reaffirming what they already do and regret the effect of this “controversy” on writers. In the last paragraph, “reporting tools” and “user moderation” sounds like more of what we already have: the ability to curate our own experience on the platform. It doesn’t sound like a top down scheme, like most of us likely fear.
You can read Platformer’s article here. Decide for yourself what they’re saying, but this line troubles me:
The company said this did not represent a reversal of its previous stance, but rather the result of reconsidering how it interprets its existing policies.
Platformer’s assertion is not supported by the quote further above. Besides that, how does one not reverse a stance while at the same time reconsidering interpretation? This is classic doublespeak.
Remember also some important context: Public published this earlier in the week. Several prominent pro-censors were upset that Substack spoke to a “favored platform” ahead of meeting with Platformer.
What I’m saying here is the game is afoot. We know illiberal leftists like these pro-censors are above all liars and charlatans with language. They are not interested in truth, but only use dialogue and debate as weapons to further their ideology. I strongly recommend not succumbing to alarm or panic, with visions of “old-Twitter” style censorship causing torment. In fact, I believe nothing would please them more.
Do what you feel is right, keep your eyes open, and remember to read this all very, very closely. Do not be fooled. Do not rise to their provocations.
Thanks for reading. Kindly share this if you feel it’s helpful and let me know your thoughts in the comments.
Jesse Singal has an excellent piece, with Substack’s full letter to Platformer along with comments from Casey Newton to Jesse, that makes it pretty clear Platformer’s article smelled funny for a reason:
It’s bullshit. Knew it.
Link:
https://open.substack.com/pub/jessesingal/p/platformers-reporting-on-substacks?r=ex433&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
Ah yes, Casey Newton, the millennial neckbeard with the eminently punchable face. May the words of free speech absolutism eternally torment him until he sees the error of his ways and changes course or devolves into a blob of leftist gibberish. And he’s halfway to the latter.